E458 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



DDDDb]i4D47b 










\^^/1.*o «5^. .'<(, .*i 









'k^ 



-ft^ 





% '-©^ /\ ■°»^-' /% Iw-' /\ 'W 









A" 






.;.3/ 



S I* E E C EL O I^^ 

HON. LEf IS B. GUSCKEL, 

OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, 

Delivered in the Senate of Ohio, March 2d, 1863, on the Resolutions of Mr. 
-J Welch in favor of the Union : 

■ /' 
Mr. President : — We have had two (was no longer to suppress the_ rebellion, 
days of discussion costing the Stite hun- 1 but in violation of ihe Constitution, to 
dreds of dollars. We have had hours of abolisih slavery. 



learned constitutional argument, hours of 
bitter j);irtisan controversy, hours devoted 

'^ to angiy and violent denunciation of our 

>4 National and Scate Administrations — and 

vpuri ■what? Let us go back and see. — 

Three siinp'e resolutions in favor of the 

>^ Union: one "renewing our pledges, in 

^ the name of the people of Ohio, to the 

General Government, to render it all the 

aid within our power, in its laudable ef- 

^3 forts to put down the rebellion, preserve 

^' the Constitution and restore the Union," 
and the other two, " solemnly protesting 
against any division of the loyal States, 
with the ultimate design of attaching any 
portion of those States to the so-called 
Southern CunfedeVacy." Is there any- 
thing in the.-e Resolutions to which a loy- 
al man could oljject ? Anything with 
which a Democrat, who professes to be in 
favor of the '' Constitution as it is and the 
Un on as it was," can find fault? 

Why then all this discu::sion, all this 



I propose to examine these points : 

WHO RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WAR. 

First, Was it possible for the Adminis- 
tration party to have pre^ entod this war? 
Are Repubiicans to blame for its inaugu- 
ration? Is it really a "Lincoln war," 
"an Abolition war," as charged by the 
Democratic orators and editors? I find 
an answer in the Crittenden Resolutions, 
about which Senators have spoken so much 
and so eloquently. The Senator from 
Perry embodied it in resolutions he offer- 
ed last winter, and we are told that it ex- 
presses the doctrines of the Democratic 
party on the subject of the war. The 
Crittenden Resolution says (and I quote 
the exact language :) 

" That the present deplorable civil warhas been 
forced upon the countrj by the di.^unionisl.s of the 
Southern Stati'S. now in revolt asainst the Con- 
stitutional (iovernmeut, and in arms around the 
Capitol." 

jMark the language, " that the present 



bitter inveclive ? I have listened for two : deplorable civil war has been forced upon 
days, with the most careful attention, to | the country " — not by the Republican 
the speeches of the* learned Senators on party, not by Lincoln or his administra- 
the opposition, with a view of ascertain-! tion, not even by the Abolitionists of the 
iiig, and I have been able to gather but North,but "by the disunionists OF the 



two points : 

First, That the war with all its terri- 
ble evils, might have been prevented, if 



Southern States." Could proof be 
stronger or more conclusive? 

But it is alleged that this might have 



at the proper time, certain concessions had been avoided, if at an earlier day, the 
been made and certain compromises per- j Republicans had favored the Crittenden 
mitted by the Republican or Union amendment. AVould its adoption have 
party. I appeased the South — prevented seces- 

Second, That after the war was com-'siou? If so, why did Southern Senators 
menced, the Democratic party would have refuse to vote for it y Why did Keitt of 
continued to support the Administration, South Carolina, telegraph to his own 
had it not demonstrated that its purpose State, "We can get the Crittenden Com- 



promise, but wewill have no compromise?" 
Why did Yancey, in December, 1861, use 
the following' language: '"No profiered 
compromise, no amendments to the Con- 
Btitution, no additional guarantees, can 
delay her (the South's) action for inde- 
pendence one moment. There is no de- 
fect in the fundamental law — therefore, it 
needs no alteration ?" Afterward, Yan- 
cey, in connection with Rust and Mann, 
as commissioners from the Confederate 
States, to Grreat Britain, in a formal com- 
munication made by them to Lord Rus- 
sel, used this language : " It was from no 
fear that the slaves would be liberated, 
that secession took place. The very par- 
ty in power had proposed to guarantee 
slavery forever in the States, if the South 
would but remain in the Union." 

Do you want further proof? I will 
give it to you, and from authority you 
dare not dispute. I read from Stephen 
A. Douglas, and it is one of the last of 
his public utterances : 

"There never has been a time, from the day 
that Washington was inauguraled first Prosiiient 
of these Uni ed States when the rights of the 
Southern States stood firmer under the laws 
of the land than they do now ; there never 
was a time when they had not as good cause fo 
disunion as they have to-day. "^^ * •■= '■' The 
slavery question is a mere pretext. The election 
of Lincoln a mere excuse. The present secession 
movement is the result of an enormous conspira- 
cy, formed by leaders in the Southern Confedera- 
cy, more than twelve months ago-" 

Douglas ought to be good authority to 
Democrats — ho used to be, I am sure. 
If good authority, then have I clearly 
proven that slavery was a mere pretext, 
that no concession, no compromise on the 
part of the North could have prevented 
secession, and as a consequence, war, with 
all its terrible incidents. 

Mr. FiNCK — Will the Senator allow me 
just here to read from Mr. Douglas on 
this point: 

" If you of the Republican side are not willing 
to accept this, nor the proposition of the Senator 
from Kentucky. (Mr Crittenden) pray tell mo 
what you are willini; to do? 1 address the inqui- 
ry to the llepublicans alone, for the reason that 
in the committee of thirteen, a few days ago 
every member frOm the South, including those' 
from the Cotton States, (Messrs. Toombs and Da- 
vis) expressed their readiness to accept the prop- 
osition of my venerable friend from Kentucky 
(Mr, Crittenden) as a final settlement of the con- 
troversy, if tendered and sustained bv the Repub- 
lican members. Hence the sole responsibility of 
our disagreement, and the only diffi>"ulty iu the 
way of an amicable adjustment, is with the Ee- ' 
publican party." 

Mr. GuNCKEL — Those words were 



^ -3 

used in the excitement of a heated debate 
in the Senate, and at a time, when he may 
have considered Davis and Toombs worthy 
of belief — he found out his mistake, but 
too soon afterward. Besides Davis did 
not seem anxious, at that time, for a sep- 
aration; but wV.-a 5 .J own views were, 
he did not speak, iox Wiglall, Benjamin, 
Slidell and other Senators, who, although 
in their seats at the time, refused to vote 
for the Crittenden Compromise, and so 
helped to del'eat it. Douglas afterward 
said, what I know to be true, for I was in 
Washington at the time and heard similar 
language, that Southern members declar- 
ed, if they were furnished with a blank 
sheet of paper and pern)itted to write 
their own terras thereon, they would not 
consent to remain in the Union. 

No, the South wanted no compromise, 
she had long before determined on sepa- 
ration and the establishment of a new 
Confederacy with slavery for its corner 
stone. General Jackson, in a letter to a 
friend on nullification, written twenty 
years ago, said, " Tke tariff via& only tloi 
pret'Xf, and disunion and a Soiifheru Cmi- 
fedcraci/ the real ohject. The next pretext 
iciTI he the neriro or the slavery question.^' 

The old Hero was right ; the South 
never abandoned that purpose and the 
present wicked rebellion is the consum-. 
mation of what Calhoun's followers have 
labored for ever since, that time. Said 
Mr. Ehett, in the South Carolina Con- 
vention, " The secession of South Caro- 
lina is not an event of a day. It /.-• tiof 
anything jn'oduced hy Mr. Linroln'f. < la-- 
tion, or the non-execution of the fn git ice 
slave law. It has beex a matter 

WHICH HAS BEEN (iATHERIXCi HEAD FOK 

THIRTY YEARS. ' 3ir. Keitt, in the same 
Convention, said, '■'■ IJiave been engaged 
in this movement (secession) ever since I 
entered political life." 

And yet learned Senators on this floor, 
knowing, as they must, all these facts, tell 
us they cannot support the war, because 
the North did not compromise and ,so 
prevent secession ! Do they not, like 
their Democratic brethren in the South, 
also make this a "mere pretext?" You 
shall see, before I am through. 

FOR WHAT THE WAR IS PROSECUTED. 

I now come to the second point, urged 



at p:reat lenjrth and with much learning 
and eloquence by the opposition, to wit: 
Tiiat thti Domocratio party would have 
cjntiaued to support the Administration 
juid the war, had not the President aban- 
doned his original policy of prosecuting 
the war, by eoHw'' -:-,. t:i;ij means, for the 
sole purpose of sup[*\te*i'iig the rebellion. 
Now, Mr. President, I claim," that the 
President has not abandoned his original 
policy, but that he still prosecutes the 
war, under the Constitution and for the 
f<9le purpose of suppressing the rebellion. 
And on this point I call as my witness 
one whose honesty will not be question- 
ed, the President himself. I read from 
the reply of the President to the address 
of the working men of Manchester : 

When I came, on the 4th of March. 1861, through 
a tree and ooustituttonal ulection, to preside in 
the Government of the United States, the I'oiin- 
try w;is found at the vevj^ti of a civil war. What- 
ever raiijht have b 'en the cau«e, or whose soever 
tiie fault, one duty paramount to all others, 
was before me, namely to maintain and preserve 
at ouee the Coasticution and the intesrity of the 
Federal Republic. A conscientious purpose to 
psrforra this duty is the key to all the measures! 
of administration which have been, and to alii 
whicu will hereafter be, pursued. 

Here, if ever, the President would I 
have averred the fact, if he hid prose- 1 
cuted the war in any other way or for any| 
other purpose than avowed : for the Eng-| 
lish people have from the beginning re. I 
fused us sympathy because we prosecated 
the war for the restoration of the Union 
and not for the abolition of slavery. | 

HABEAS CORPUS AND ARBITRAllV AR-; 
RESTS. 

But it is charged by Senators that the I 
President has been guilty of a palpable | 
find gross violation of the Constitution iuj 
this, that he has assumed to suspend thei 
writ of habeas corpus, when that great i 
privilege was peculiarly w^ithin the power j 
of Congress. These gentlemen admit j 
that the Constitution says that this writ: 
may be suspended in times of great dan- 
ger, in case of invasion or rebellion— by 
whom? This is just the question. 
Learned lawyers and writers have said that 
the privilege belongs to Congress ; while 
others, equally learned, have said it be- 
longs to the President. Who is to deter- 
mine the question '/ Who but the Presi- 
dent, who has taken a solemn oath to 
" preserve, protect and defend " this same 



Constitution ? This ought not to be dis- 
puted by Democrats, for it has always 
been a part of their party creed. Bat to 
remove all doubt, 1 read from an author!- 
they, they will hardly question, it is from 
the celebrated Bank Veto Message of 
Andrew Jackson : 

" The Congress, the E.\ecutive. and the Supreme 
Court, must each for itseli be guided by its own 
opiuiou of the Constitution- pjaf.h public officer 
who takes an oath to support the Constitution, 
means that he will support it as he understands 
it, and not as it is understood by others It is as 
much the duty of the House of Representatives, 
of the 8enatj, and of the President, to decide up- 
on tlie constitutionality of any bill or resolutiun 
which may be presented to them for passage or 
approval, as it is f(jr the Supreme Judges, when 
it may be brought belore thein Kor judicial deoi 
siou. The opinion of the .1 uuges has no more au- 
thority over Congress than tne opinion of Con- 
gress lias over the .Fudges, and on that point the 
President is independent of both " 

The President is to determine these 
questions ibr himself — is he? Well that's 
just what Abraham Lincoln did. If right 
for President Jackson to interpret the 
Constitution for himself, it ought to be 
equally so for President Lincoln. But if 
not the President, who is to determine 
the constitutionality of any measure ? 
The Supreme Couit? Why even the 
Democratic party refused to abide by its 
decisions. I find by reference to Hal- 
stead's History of the National Demo- 
cratic Convention,' held at Charleston, 
that 3Ir. Ewing, of Tennessee, oflered the 
following resolution : 

*' Inasmuch as differences of opinion exist in the 
Democratic party as to the nature and extent of 
powers of a territorial legislature, and as to the 
powers and duties of Congress, under the Consti- 
tution of the United States, over the institution 
of slavery in the territories ; 

" Resolved, That the Democratic party will 
abide by the decisions of the Suprme Court of the 
United States on the questions of constitutional 
law," 

Here was a proposition that the Dem- 
ocratic party should simply abide by the 
decision of the Supreme Court, and it 
was voted down by a vote of 21 for and 
238 against — the ivhole Ohio delegation 
voting against the resolution. 

But how came the President to suspend 
the writ of habeas corpus. It must be 
remembered that when on the 4th of 
March, ISlil, he came into power, seven 
State.s, being South Carolina, Mississippi, 
Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana and 
Texas had seceded, the rebel Congress 
had met at Montgomery, adopted a con- 
stitution, elected and inaugurated a Pre*- 



4 



ident and Vice President, and matured a 

bill for raising 100,000 soldiers. P'or 
weeks tliere.if'ier, the President's course 
was every way pacific. But 1 need not 
teil you how the rebels fired on the Star 
of the West, when he attempted to send 
provisions to Fort Sumter ; how cowardly 
they attacked the little garrison of one 
hundred starving men under JLijor An- 
derson with eleven batteries and 8,0o0 
men ; how alter they compelled its sur- 
render, Mr. Walker, the Kebel Secrelary 
of War, boasted they would immediately 
march on and take Washington. You 
know all this, and what iollowed, only 
too Vi'ell. Suffice it to say, that after iour 
more States had seceded, an attempt was 
uiade to take Maryland out. There seem- 
ed but one way to save her to the Union 
and that was to crush the movement by 
an arrest of the leading traitors. Then 
was forced upon the President the ques- 
tion whether he was auihurizcd under the 
Constitution to susftend the writ and order 
the arrests. He examined that sacred in- 
strument — it clearly gave the power — 
b it to whom? He consulted his law ad- 
viser and his Cabinet — they agreed the 
power was his and that the absolute neces- 
sity of the case required its immediate ex- 
ercise. They urged upon him, that such 
arrests had been made under Washington 
in the Revolution and by Jackson in the 
war of 1812. Satisfied that it was his 
duty, he did it, and loyal men everywhere 
applauded the act, for by it Maryland was 
saved to the Union. 

Are Democrats, because they happen 
to take a different view of this constitu- 
tional question, or because they happen to 
doubt the propriety of these arrests, ab- 
solved from the allegiance they owe their 
Government in a time of war ? Will loyal 
men refuse to support their Grovernment, 
in a time of great public danger, on any 
such pretext? 

THE EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION. 

And now as to the Emancipation Proc- 
lamation. It is charged that it too is a 
flagrant violation, not only of the Consti- 
tution, but of the Law of Natiuns. The 
Senator fr)m Perry argues, and with 
much ingenuity and ability, that this is 
not a rebellion but a civil war, and that 
beiug a civil war, the Confederatee are 



guaranteed under the law of nations, all 
the rights of belligerents, and that among 
these, is the right of alsidute security to 
the private property of individuals, that 
slaves are such property, and hence can 
not legally be confi.~cated or emancipated 
by the President as Commander-in-Chief 
of our armies. 

Now, in the first place, I do not con- 
cede that this is technically a civil war. 
Halleck, in his work on International 
Law, page 333, says : 

" Wnrs of insurrectii>n and revolutinn are. in 
one sense, civil vrars, but, thi:* term is mure usu- 
ally applicil to those conttjsts which are waged be- 
tween rival families or fa(aions tor party ascend- 
ancy in a Slate, rather than for its dismember- 
ment, or for a radic:il change in its government. 
Each party in .such cases is usually entitled to the 
rights of war as against the other and also with 
respect to neutrals. Mk.rk rebei,i,ions, however. 

AllE CONSIDEUED AS EXCEPTIONS TO THIS KTLE. as 
every government treats those who rebel against 
its authority, aceordiig to its own municipal laws 
and without reaard to the general rules which 
internatinnal jui isprudence establishes between 
sovereign Stales " 

But again, I do not concede, that by 
the law of nations, as between beliger- 
ents, the President would be prevented 
from using such means as would be ne- 
cessary to weaken the enemy and force 
an early and honorable peace. And on 
this point I quote first the opinion of 
Judge Story, in Cranch's Reports, vol. 8, 
page 167 : 

" All that I contend for is that a declaration of 
wargives a right to confiscate enemy's propi'rty 
and enables tlie power to whom the (•.■secutioii of 
the laws and the prosecution of the war are con- 
tided to entbrce that right. If, indeed, there be a 
limit imposed as lo the extent t<j which hostilities 
may be carried by the ^ xecutivc, I admit that the 
Executive can not lawfully transcend that limit : 
but if no such limit exists, the war ma> be carried 
(in according to the principles of the modern law 
of nations, and enforced when, and where, and ou 
what property, the Executive chooses," 

And again, I quote Vatel, p. 347 : 

" Since the object of a just war is to repress in- 
justice and violence, and forcibly to compel him 
who is deaf to the voice of justice, we have a 
right to put in practice, against ihe enemy every 
measure that is necessary in orJer to weaken him 
and disable him from resist ni; us and supporting 
his injustice ; and we may choose such methods as 
are the most efficacious and best calculated to at- 
tain the end in view, provided they be not of an 
odious kind, nor uujusiitiable in themselves, and 
prohibited by the law of nations,' 

I have other authorities, even stronger 
than these, but I will not deta'n the Sen- 
ate by reading them at this time. I am 
quite free to admit, that these same books 
lay it down that " private property on 
1 ind, is now, as a general rule ot war, ex- 
empt from seizure or confiscation," but 



5 



they also state that •■ thi:< rule is not by 
any means absolute or universal '" — and 
the exceptions given. such as confiscations 
or seizures by ■way of penalty fur military 
ofreiises, contributions for the support of 
the invading- armies, property taken in 
storming a fortress or town, etc.. show that 
the exceptions are about as general as the 
rule itself. 

But it has been no part of my purpose 
to argue this que.-tion — that has heen so 
ably and well done by others, that I am 
spared the effort. All I have cared to 
show is that in this ca^e, as in that of the 
suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, 
there were grave legal questions which 
somebody had to determine, that that 
somebody Avas of necessity the President 
himself, that if he hone-tly determined 
them, and for justifiable purposes, wheth- 
er right or wrong, it is the bounden duty 
of all loyal men to support and sustain 
him therein. And how came he to issue 
the proclamation? It was represented to 
the President, by his Cabinet and his 
Generals, that notwithstanding all the ex- 
penditure of money and sacrifice of Hfe. 
the rebellion, instead of being suppressed, 
was gaining strength and becoming more 
formidable ; and they declared that the 
strong arm of the enemy was their slaves ; 
that they not only aided the rebellion 
by digging their trenches, building their 
forts, but gave them support and succor 
by cultivating their fields and supplying 
them with bread and clothing. Strike 
down this power, said they, and we can 
overcome this rebellion. What was the 
President's duty ? Who was to deter- 
mine? Who but himself? lie did de- 
termine and act — and whether wisely or 
not — I shall not now inquire. But one 
thing is certain, that whatever its results 
at home it has had a most happy efiiect 
abroad. The people of England, France, 
and indeed of Europe, could not under- 
stand our contest. Our struggle for the 
Union seemed to them a struggle for a 
mere abstraction. The President's proc- 
lamation has opened their eyes ; they 
now see the true nature of the contest, 
theirsympathies are with u^, and so strong 
has this feeling grown, that late advices 
assure us, that neither England or France 
would now dare to disregard their opin- 
ions and intervene in our affairs. 



DUTY OF LOYAL MEN. 

But. Mr. President, whether the Pres- 
ident acted wisely or not, whether good or 
bad results have followed, it is the duty 
of all loyal men to siipport the Crovern- 
ment, in time of war as again>t a coyi- 
mon enemy. All the books figrec that 
" when a State has declared war, every 
citizen is bound to assist in carrying it fo 
a successful conclusion, whatever may be 
his individual opinion of the necessity or 
propriety of the resort to arms by his own 
gnvernment. Even though he may not 
deem the objects of the war justifiable, 
or its motive commendable, he is, never- 
theless, bound to stand by the State in 
the prosecution of that war.'' It is the 
same principle aptly expiessed in what 
u^ed to be Democratic doctrine, " inY 
COUNTRY BIGHT OR WRONG." And yet 
Senators, claiming to be Democrats and 
loyal men, declare that because they do 
not happen to agree w-ith the Presiuent 
as to the legality or propriety of some of 
his measures, they will render no aid, no 
assistance whatever to the Government in 
this her struggle for national resistance. 

Test this course of conduct by a fami- 
liar illustration. The Senator from Per- 
ry, on stepping into the street sees his 
neighbor's house on fire ; he sees that un- 
less the fire be checked, and that speedi- 
ly, it will destroy not only that house, but 
the houses of other neighbors. He starts 
to help — but stops, looks on and coolly 
says, " That's a bad fire, a very bad fire ; 
it was vei'y wicked to set fire to that poor 
man's liouse, it ought to be put out ; yes 
it ought, by all means to be put out, it 
seems to need every body s help, but / 
don't like ihe ivay those firemen are doing 
it ; I don't think that's the best way^ and 
Im afraid they are violating some ordi- 
7iance of the town or some jjrinciple of the 
common law ; I tcill have nothing to do 
with it; I tcill neither hel^J myse/f 7ior 
encourage others to help. 

What would his neighbors conclude, 
what say of him';* Why, that he didn't 
leant the fire jnd out ; that he nanted the 
hmise to hum down, and that his sympa- 
thies were with the incendiary and not 
with the owner of the house. Just so 
with our country. The Senator from 
Perry sees her in danger — about to bo 



destroyed by wicked men. lie lieiu'.s the 
call for help, reto^^-iiizes its necessity, but 
refuses aid. becau.-e he docsiit like the icay 
in which the Pn-sident and the ioyal iico- 
■ple are trying to save, the country! Are 
we to canelude that he makes this a mere 
pretext and that his s-yr.ipathies are with 
the rebels, and not with the brave and 
gallant men who light under the " Stars 
and Stripes ? " 

"SVENDELL PHILLIPS, GARRISON & CO. 

But Senators have, durinir this whole 
discussion, made persistent effo:ts to hold 
the Administr.ition re-pousible for the 
extreme views of Wendell Phillips, Cxar- 
rison, Pillsbury and others, of that school. 
In the name oi' the I'^nion party, I utter- 
ly repudiate them. They never belonged 
to the Whig, Republican, or Union par- 
ties, and we are not responsible for their 
views. But there is a striking similarity 
between their positions and that of this 
patent, modern Di^mocracy. What dues 
Phillips say ? What has he said all 
through the war ? 

"If the President wages this war for the sole 
purpose of thu abolition of slavery I will sup- 
port him : but if he does it to preserve the Union, 
I will have nothing to do with it." 

Mr. Kexney — Does not Cassius M. 
Clay, who is one of the Administration 
Generals, say the same thing. 

Mr. (tUNCKEL — I don't know what 
Mr. Clay's views are on this point, but if 
his support of the Grovernment is condi- 
tioned, upon its adoption of this or that 
policy, like Phillips and the Senator from 
Ashland, then I repudiate his doctrines 
also. 

Mr. Kenney — The Administration 
honors him by appointment to office. 

Mr. Gunckel — No doubt the Admin- 
istration has been deceived by some un- 
worthy men from the Republican party, 
as I know it has been by some from the 
Democratic party. Such mishaps are 
unavoidable. 

Similar attempts are niJide to hold the 
Union party responsible for certain ex- 
treme views of Mr. Conway, of Kansas. 
I believe he was a Republican, but his 
recent speeches and votes have not been 
sanctioned by even his old party friends, 
but on the other hand, his own Legisla- 
ture and the Union press oil over the 



North have repudiated him and his doc- 
trines. But what is the matter with Con- 
way. The war is not conducted in the 
particular way that he thinks it should 
be, and therefore will have no more to do 
with it. Preciselj'' the position taken by 
all the Democratic Senators on this floor. 
They alike denounce the Administration 
— alike refuse their country help in this 
its hour of sorest need, and whether they 
mean it or not, alike give " aid and com- 
furt to the enemy." 

the yallandigham democracy. 

But, Mr. President. I very much I'ear, 
that if the Administration were to go 
back to its original policy, as these Sen- 
ators want it to do, it would not bring 
the Democratic party to an honest, hearty 
support of the war; I fear this is only 
another "pretext." Vallaudigham, in 
his late New Jersey speech, as I find it 
in the " Crisis," edited by that " blessed 
martyr," Samuel Medary, says : 

" There never was a time when, in the hearts of 
the people, there was not an undjing opposition 
to the war." And again: ' Seventy-five out of 
every hundred of the men of the Noi th-west are 
in favor of a cessation of hostilities." 

He speaks of course for the Democratic 
irdYty ; he could speak for no other. 

'' But," says the Senator from Cler- 
mont, " I don't approve of all Vallandig- 
htim's sentiments; he does not represent 
the Democratic party of Ohio." I take 
issue with him there. 

He does represent the Democratic par- 
ty of Ohio, if we are to judge the party 
by its leaders. I assert, and in so doing- 
challenge contradiction, that every Dem- 
ocratic paper in Ohio has, in whole or in 
part, published his late speech in the 
House of Representatives ; that not one of 
these papers has dissented from his views, 
or condemned the doctrines of his speech, 
but that FORTY- NINE OUT OP EVERY FIF- 
TY OP THEM HAVE FULLY ENDORSED 
HIM AND SANCTIONED AND APPROVED 
THE DOCTRINES OF HIS SPEECH ! 

Mr. FiNCK questioned the truth of the 
statement as to his district. 

Mr. Gunckel — You shall see. The 
Senator's organ is the Perry County Dem- 
ocrat. I read from it the following ar- 
ticle : 

" VALLANDTGHAM FOR GOVEKNOR. 

" We to-day raise to our mast head the honored. 



respected and much beloved name of C Ij. ^ al- 
landisham as the clioicu of the Democracy of Per- 
ry for the next fiovernor o;' the State ot Ohio 
Had we known weeks ago what wo do now, this 
would have been dune ttien. But there wa.s a del- 
ioacy existing on our part and that of the Deitloc- 
racy of the ci.;unty on the subject. All of us felt 
tliateitlier this Kentleman or Ur. Olds should bo 
the next Governor, but we did nut know iiow to 
choose; and, in fact, did not know to a certainty 
that V 111. would consent to run. But now the af- 
fair is arranKi;d— the latter has. by letter-whieh 
will be seen on the first p:iKe of to-day's pupur— 
consented to be a candidate, and the Doctor has 
coueluded to remain a private PUULIC stumper for 
the present— that is, after his present honored 
term expires 

"aII hail. then, to the honored name of Vallan- 
diffham! The conservative people of the State 
of Ohio will place him in a position that he ' may 
iae,' as ho says, 'able to hasten a re-uuiou of these 
States.' " 

I think tins settles tlie question so far 
as Perry county is concerned. 

The Senator from Clermont does nnt 
approve of Vallandigham. Let us see 
what his organ, the Clermont Sun, has to 
say : 

" The Clarke County Democrat is out for H .T 
Jewett for tioveraor. As we are an original Val- 
landighamer. of course we prefer him. since (Jov- 
eruor Medary has declined. We think Jewett hijs 
dirtied his hands too much with this war. ^Ye 
want men for office with clean records." 

Mr. Johnston admitted that the Cler- 
mont Sun had indori^ed Vallandighani. 
but he could show a subsequent article 
from that paper very much qualifying its 
first utterances on the subject. 

Mr. Gunckel — Quite possible. A 
very great reaction has been going on in 
your party within the past few weeks. 

And now I will read from the Ohio 
Eagle : 

" And we are happy in the belief — might say 
positive knowledge — that the Deiuocrn.iry jire unit- 
edly for him, (Vallandighani). There may ykt be 
a few weak-kneed " Usios ' things clinging to the 
skirts of the Democratic prrty in this community, 
who will object to Vallandigham. For these we 
do not speak We turn all such over to the famous 

LETTER WRITKR, JeWett." 



Mr. FiNCK stated that in his Congres- 
sional disti-ict three of the Democratic 
papers were for Vallandigham and three 
for flewett. 

Mil. Gunckel — That may be, but they 
all indorse Vallandigham as a patriot 
and sound to the core as a Democrat, al- 
though as a matter of policy they may 
prefer some one else as a candidate for 
Governor. 

Does any other Senntpr on the opposi- 
tion deny my statement, if so, I will read 
from his own organ similar extracts, for 
I am prepared to make good my state- 



ment. But unless the proof be called 
for, I shall not detain the Senate longer 
than to read one more extracts. I read 
irom the Ohio Statesman an article copied 
from the Cincinnati Enquirer : 

" As IT Should Be— We understand that a very 
friendly correspondence has passed between Hun. 
Hugh .r. Jewett and Hon. C I. Vallandigham. in 
which both express a strong desire that the ut- 
most harmony and good feeling shall prevail be- 
tween themselves and their I riends. hat is as 
it should be. When consti tntioniil hoerty and 
individual freedom and Slate rights are in peril. 
Democrats should not allow any personal consut- 
erationsorby gones to stiui'l in the wui ol a cor- 
dial union of action, to preserve what Hlone dig- 
nities, preserves and perpetuates the indcpi-nd- 
enee and manhood of the Americau citiaen-— Ciu. 
tnquiref. Fob. iicth." 

So it seems, it has merely been a '-per- 
sonal (lifficiiitij " between Jewett and Va!- 
landigliam, and even that has now bei^n 
"amicably adjasied," and hereafter we 
are to have the "utmost harmony and 
good feeling " between them and their 
friends. Loyal Democrats all over the 
State, who iiave been favoring Jewett, 
have in their innocence supposed thee 
were radical political differences of opin- 
ion between him and Vallandigham, but 
it turns out to have been merely a '■ per- 
sonal difficulty." We are to presume 
that they agree politically, and that Mr. 
Jewett, like Senators here, will cheeriul 
ly support Vallandigham, when nouiin: - 
ted (as I believe he will be) by their 
State Convention for Governor. 

THE A'ALLANDIGHAM PT-ATFORM. 

I have thus shown, beyond all contro- 
versy, that the leaders of the straight 
Deoiocratic party of Ohio endorse Val- 
landigham and his doctrines. They stand 
unmistakably on the Vallandigham 
platform. And now, what is that plat- 
form ? What are the doctrines of this 
man, whom the leaders wish the honest, 
loyal Democrats of Ohio to endorse ? 
Let bis speeches and votes answer. On 
the 2d N.^veudier, 1800, (before any State 
had seceded) in a speech in Cooper Insti- 
tute, he said : 



" If any one or more of the States of this Union 
should, at any time, secede— for reasons, of the 
sulheiency and iustice of which, before God and 
the groat tribun'il of history, they alone may judge 
—much as I should deplore it, I nevf.k wori.D. as 
.\ Rki'he.'^entativr in the Conokess of THE Lm- 
TED States vote one poli.ar of money wherk- 

BV ONE DBOP OF AMERICAN BLOOD SHOULD BE 
SUED IN CIVIL WAR." 

He was true to his word — he never did 



8 



vo'e n man or a doUir! In liis late 
spee-jh in the House of Keprerientatives, 
he says : 

" I did not support tlie w.ir ; and today I bless 
GuJ. that not the sinell of so iniicli as one drop of 
its blood is upon my garinenta." 

And yet it has been cUiimed here thnt 
the Democratic part}^ would support the 
war^ if it were ttill conducted m a con- 
stitutional way. Vallaudij-ham declared 
against tlie war, not only beibre the su^- 
pen.sion of the writ of habeas corpus and 
tlie is.iu ng of the Emancipation Procla- 
uvati tn.'but before the tear had i/<'t begun ! 
But to remove all doubt on this point, I 
le.er Senators to the following resolution 
oifered by Mr. Adrian on the 7th of Jan- 
uary, ISiJl : 

'■ Kesolved, That we fully approve nf the bold 
and pilriotic act of Major Audursoo.in withdraw- 
iiis; troiu furt Aiouitne to fort riuiuter, and of the 
il'jtermiaatioa of the Prusideiit t,o sustain that 
f'.rarless officer in his present position- and that 
we will support the President m all Ooastitutiou- 
al m.jasures to enforce the laws and preserve the 
Union." 

Mark the language, '' that loe will sup- 
port the President in all constitutional 
measures to enforce the laws and preserve 
the Vnion." Just what our friends say 
the Democrats have been and still are 
wdiing to do. Yet on the question of 
adopting that resolution, Vailandigham 
voted NO. 

Mr. Kenney — How did the Republicans 
vote on that resolution '( 

Mr. GuNCKEL — They voted for it — 
unanimously. Indeed Vailandigham was 
the on y man on the Ohio delegation who 
voted against it, and one of only four 
members from the entire North who were 
mean enough to voie the same way. And 
yet Senators who so loudly assert their 
■willingness to prosecute the war, in a con 
sdtutional way, are willing to endorse 
Yallan Jighani by voting for him for Gov- 
ernor ! 

Dut let us look a little further into his 
record. In his 14th January speech, he 
says, '■ and now sir, I will not ask whether 
the North-west can consent to i-eparation 
from the South. Never. Nature forbids." 
Jriovv do you reconcile that with his letter 
to Rev. Sabin Hough, in which he Says, 
" But all is over nuAV. It is loo late for 
anything but peaceable S' para tion." And 
how that with this further extract from 
his l-4th January speech'/ 



" Sir, we otin not, ou?ht not, will not, separnte 
from the South. And if you of the East, who 
have found this war against the South, and for 
the negro, sratifyius to your hate or profitable to 
your pursf. will continue it till a separation be 
forced between the slavehoMins; and your non- 
•slaveh./ldins States, then, believe me, and accept 
it, as yiiu di<l not tlie other solemn warnings of 
years past, the day which divides thk .Nohtu 
FuoM TUK South, TH \T selfsame mav ueckeks 

ETE14NAL UlVUKUE BETWEKN THE WeST AND THE 

Kast." 

How, I ask, do you reconcile these 
with each , other ? And how all these 
with his celebrated '' Quarter Section " 
proposition, by which he proposed to cut 
the Union into four p'eces. How, exce'pt 
on the supposition that he contemjjlates, 
nay more, desires, a separation of the 
West from New England and a Union of 
the North-west with the South? And 
are the Democratic misses of Ohio pre- 
pared to endorse such doctrines. I do 
not believe it, for I have too much faith 
in their honest}'-, their loyalty, their de- 
voted love to the Union. But that the 
leaders, notwithstanding their clamor for 
the "Constitutiim as it is and the Union 
as it was,'' do endorse, fully and entirely, 
these doctrines, I think, I have clearly 
shown. 

And right here, let me commend to the 
Senators from Perry and Seneca, who pro- 
fess to be in favor, not only of the prose- 
cution of the war, but a vigorous prosecu- 
tion, "provided it be in const:tutional . 
way " to a remark from that most blssed 
.'f all the -'blessed martyrs," Mahoney of 
the Dubuque (lowa) Herald : 

" When we bear Democrats declare that they 
will support the war, provided it be restored to a 
war for the Union, we pity or despise thetn" 

It shows the high consideration in 
which war Democrats are held by the 
leaders of the new Democracy, who like 
Vailandigham, pride themselves on being 
called '' butternu s.' 

PEACE AND COMPROMISE. 

But, sir, we have heard much of the 
horrors of war and the liveliness of peace. 
God knows, I too, deprecate war 1 I too 
long for peace. But how is it possible ? 
By compromise about wdiich Senatois 
tajk so much? Can we do it by pass- 
ing peace le-olutions as did the Leg- 
islatures of New Jersey and Illinois? 
Will the rebels listen to compromise? 
Let us see. I read first from a late 
speech made by the President of the 



Confederate States, Jefferson Davis, at 
Jackson, Miss : 

" After what has happened during the last two 
years, my ouly wonder is that we consented to live 
for so Ions a time in association with such mis- 
creants, and have loved so much a (Jovernment 
rotten to the core. Were it evor to be proposed 
again to enter into a Union with such a people. I 
Could no more consent to it than to trust myself 
in a den Oi thieves." 

The Richmond Dispatch clinches this 
by saying : 

" We warn the Democrats and Conservatives of 
the North to dismiss from their minds, nt once the 
MISEKABLE DELUSION that the South can ever con- 
sent to enter again, upon any terms, the old 
Union ; " that '' if the Aorth will allow us to write 
the Constitution ourselves, and give us every 
guarantee we would ask, we would sooner be un- 
der the Government of England or France " 

Again the Richmond Whig of the 10th 
says : 

" We have committed many errors in our treat- 
ment of the Yankees. Not the least has been in 
regarding them as something better than they 
really are- They are by nature menials, and 

FITTED only FOR MENIAL DUTIES- ThEY ARE IN 
OPEN FLAGRANT INSURRECTION AGAINST THEIR 
NATURAL LORDS AND MASTERS, THE GENTLEMEN OF i 

THE South." I 

One more quotation, and that from a 
leader in the Richmond Enquirer on Val- 
landigham's late great speech : I 

''If they repudiate the debt they have contract 
ed, and abandon the government they established, 
and recant vows, and break pledges, and eat dirt, 
it is well; we shall be charmed; the movement 
will suit us perfectly ; and although we shall not 
exactly respect the actors in that affair, yet we 
shall not be unwilling to trade with them— hold- 
ing our noses a little— not to show them all suit- 
able civilities— but at a proper distance." I 

"Eat dirt" — that's good. Are peace 
Democrats •willing to do that? Are Sen- 
ators willing to compromise on such terms? 
I would not have believed it, had I not 
heard the speech of the Senator from 
Seneca. He is willing to compromise, 
and great God — upon what terms ? I 
Itope it will be put upon record and sent 
out to the loyal people of Ohio and of 
the North, that the Senator from Seneca, 
speaking for the Democracy of Ohio, has 
stated upon this floor, that he is willing 
to compromise with the South hy permit- 
ting slavery to spread over and occupy 
every inch of the ierritory of the States of 
the free North! So spoke not Washing- 1 
ton, so spoke not Jefferson and the other 
great fathers of the Republic, who left! 
upon record their testimony against hu- 
man slavery ! So spoke not Daniel Web- 
ster, who declared, he would '■'■never con- 
sent to the extension of the area of slave- 
ry in the United States ! " • So spoke not 
2 



glorious old Henry Clay, when on a 
memorable occasion, he uttered these elo- 
quent words : 

" I have said that I never could vote for it my- 
self 'and \ repeat, that I never Can and never 

WILL vote, and NO earthly power ever WILL 

make me vote, to spread slavery over ter- 
ritory WHERE slavery DOES NOT NOW EXIST.' 

Mr. Lano. — Would not the Senator 
sooner have slavery than lose the Union ? 

Mr. GuNCKEL. — " Liberty and Union, 
one and inseparable," said Webster, and 
so say I. 

Mr. Lang. — But how if presented aa 
an alternative ? 

Mr. GuNCKEL. — That alternative nev- 
er will come. Thank God, we can put 
down the rebellion, restore the Union, and 
still retain our liberties. 

THE CHIVALRY OF THE SOtTTH. 

And to whom would the Senator yield 
up to the curse of slavery, the territory 
consecrated to freedom by the blood of 
our fathers? To the villains and traitors 
who have murdered our fathers, sons and 
brothers and desecrated the bodies of our 
dead. Senators have grown pathetic over 
the imprisonment of Dr. Olds. Why no 
expressions of sympathy for the four hun- 
dred Southern Union men, of whona the 
papers tell us this morning, many of 
them over eighty years of age, who are 
now suffering in rebel prisons for no of- 
fense but loving the old Union and the 
old flag. Why no sympathy for the 
Union men and women of East Tennes- 
see, Northern xVlabama and Texas, driven 
from their homes, hunted down by blood 
hounds, imprisoned, murdered, because of 
their loyalty to the government of their 
fathers. Why not a word of indignation 
at the rebels for their inhuman and bar- 
barous treatment of our own sick, wound- 
ed and dying soldiers ? Why not a word 
of denunciation for their infernal conduct 
in desecrating the bodies of our dead ? — 
The Senator from Ashland laughs — does 
he think these things funny ? 

Mr. Kenney. — I laugh to think any- 
body would believe such ridiculous stories. 

Mr. GuNCKEL. — If the Senator will- 
not believe what has so frequently been 
told by our officers and men and Union 
refugees from the South, he will believe 
the Report of the Investigating Commit- 
tee appointed by the Senate of the United 



IP 



States, which upon the testimony of men 
like Governor Sprague, of Khode Island, 
reported that after the battle of Manassas, 
the rebels disinterred the bodies of many 
of our dead and cut off in some instusces, 
bones to be used as personal ornaments 
for chivalric Southern ladies, and in others, 
•heads to be turned into drinking cups for 
aise at a marriage festival I 

A FEW QUESTIONS FOR V.ALLANDIGHAM 
DEMOCRATS. 

But to return, why this opposit'on to 
simple resolutions in favor of sustaining 
the Government in this her struggle for 
life ? Why these quibbles as to constitu- 
tional and law quest ons ? Why these 
denunciations of the President and those 
laboring with him to preserve the integ- 
rity of the Union ? Why this want of 
sympathy with the suffering Union men 
at the South and with our brave soldiers 
in the field? Wliy su;h public state- 
ments as that made this morning by the 
Senator from Seneca, that the rebels had 
whipped us in nine battles out of every 
ten, since the war began ? Why so mis- 
8 ate the facts and so dispar ige the ex- 
ploits of our gallant army '( Why reprint 
in all the democratic papers of the State 
the speeches of Vallandigh im, Cox & Co., 
and send them by the thousands into the 
army ? Why such persistent exaggeration 
of the expenses of the war and of the 
probable amount of future taxes ? Why 
republish at so great length the slander- 
■ous editorials of the London Times and 
other foreign papers, which sympathize 
■with the rebels? Why give just now 
with such minuteness and detail, accounts 
lof the revolt at VV^arsaw in resistance of 
the Russian draft? Why denounce as 
illegal, unjust, oppressive, etc., the Con- 
scription act ? 

For what all these things are intended^ 
I leave others to determine. But what 
their effect has been, is only too manifest. 
First : It has poisoned the minds of m my 
honest, loyal people at home, weakened 
their support to the Grovernment, created 
divisions as to paltry questions of party, 
prevented enlistments and withdrawn in 
part that active moral support which loyal 
people at home should give to our brave 
men in the field. Second : It has disheart- 
ened, discouraged, and in some degree, 



demoralized the army, encouraged deser- 
tion and insubordination and so postpone(i 
victory and an early and honorable peace. 
But here I am reminded of a remark of 
the Senator i'rom Clermont, to wit : — 
'• There are no secret political societies in 
the West to discourage enlistments and 
desertions — no Knights of the (Joldea 
Circle in Ohio or Indiana — its all chip 
trap." Is it " clap trap " with Juhn U. 
Brown and others in Indiana now under 
sentence of death? Is it "clap trap" 
with those men who appeared before the 
United States Court at Indianapolis, and 
acknowledged they belonged to tlie Order, 
but p'ead that they could not tell its pur- 
poses without criminaling themselves? Is 
it " clap trap " with tho.'-e officers in the 
army who have been disgraced ibr their 
connection with the Order? Is it " clap 
trap" with the 109th Illinois Kegiment, 
which has been disbanded, because pois- 
oned by this treasonable organization? 

But I am asked whether there is not 
a secret Republican society in Ohio, or- 
ganized to put down, by force of arms, 
the Democratic party, and whether the 
society in Columbus has not four hundred 
muskets ready for that purpose? I an- 
swer, and with all frankness and honesty, 
that I know of no such secret organiza- 
tion, and that I do not believe that there 
are any such in this city or State. For 
myself, I never have been, am not now, 
and never expect to be a member of any 
secret political organization of any kind 
whatever. 

I was speaking of the effect of the 
preaching of Vallandigham's doctrines ; 
I claim. Third: That it has encouraged 
the rebels to preseverein their treasonable 
purposes to dismember this great Repub- 
lic. I verily believe that if it had not 
been for Vallandigham and his followers, 
we would months ago have crushed the 
rebellion and forced an honorable peace. 
Do you doubt it? Read the following 
from the Knoxville (Tenn.) Register, and 
see what the rebels themselves say on the 
subject : 

"Were it not for the utter demoralization of th® 
Union armies ; were it not that tlie quasi rebel- 
lion of the Governors of New Jersey and New 
York had effected Burnside's army as thoroughly 
as that of Rosecrans', which has felt more serious- 
ly the influence of Richardson, Bright and Val- 
landigham ; were these Union forces as brave and 
devoted to the cause they have espoused as they 



11 



were twelve rainths azo. Brass's army would now ' 
ui'cupy Chattanooga, Marietta, or Atlanta. In all i 
thise considerations wo find the inducements in- \ 
fluoncing Congress to enact a most stringent law, ! 
bringing into the field the whole population of the 
South capable of bearing arms," 

But, Mr. Presideut, I have already de- 
tained you too long. Let me, in conclu- 
sion, beg my Democratic friends to leave 
the new and come back to the old faith; 
to leave Valhuidigham and come back to 
Douglas. Said that great and good man, 
(and it was among the last of his public 
utterances :) 

*' Then we have a solemn duty — to maintain the 
government- The greater the unanimity, the 
speedier the day of peace. * . * f Let us lay 
aside all criminations and recrim'nations as to the 
origin of these difficulties. When we shall have 
a country, with the United States flag floating 
over it, and respected on every inch of American 
soil, it will then be time enough to ask who and 
what brought all this upon us. *. * * There 
are only two sides to the question. Every man 
must be for the United States or against it.— 
There can be no neutrals in this war, only patri- 
ots and traitors " 

Which side will you take? For or 
against your country '? " Patriots or trai- 
tors " — which are you? Was ever truth 
more opportune than this : "The greater 
oar unanimity, the speedier the day of 
peace." We are at war — we can not com- 



promke — we most figr*? it out. Unite 
with us, and we will speedily put down 
the rebellion, restore the Union, and with 
it, the blessings of peace. Separate from 
us, and while you cannot stop, nor even 
change the war, you only protract its du- 
ration and prolong its evils. 

A few weeks ago and all looked dark 
and gloomy, but thanks to a kind Provi- 
dence, a great change — a great reaction 
has taken place. The people have taken 
the sober, second thought — the world has 
witnessed the second great awakening. — 
The people, like their brave and gallant 
soldiers in the field, have become '■'■terribbj 
in earnest, earnest to conquer and destroy 
armed rebels, earnest to overcome force 
with force, earnest in the detestation of 
cowardly traitors at home, earnest in will 
and power to overcome all who desire the 
nations ruin." Let us but continue thuiS 
united, earnest, determined, and all will 
soon be well. The rebellion will be put 
down, our Union restored, our liberties 
preserved and peace, with all its attead- 
ent blessings, secured to us and to our 
children. 



Ws 



u 



ttl60 -^«! 









"^^o* 



* O 







4^ 



















•>f,<i>^ 



^•/ %*^.'\,*^ %'^^'\°'' V^"V* ' 



' • / ■» 









'^o<^" 



K^^ ^ 






I'X c°\.i.i^.> ,/..ii£i'.\ /.g.;^^.> 












«' 










J- -3 






